There is a strong
segregationist strain in the U.S

Anything that smacks of equality gets rejected. Moreover,
we don't have a commitment to human rights. If we did, food,
shelter and health care would not be conditioned on the
recipient deserving them. Indeed, if we had a true commitment
to human rights, there would be no need to bofuscate with
"entitlements." The latter are rights, but because
they are not honored, they are called something else and made
conditional.
"No free lunch" is not consistent with a commitment
to human rights.
As long as any program promotes a separate group, it has more
chance of support. Segregation for ever!
Medicare, for example, is a segregated program. The
segregation by age has no practical relationship to injury
and disease. Therefor, the separate program exists as a nod
to the segregationist impulse. Ditto for housing for the
elderly.
The integration of disabled persons into the community is
contrary to the segregationist impulse. It is an impulse that
survives regardless of which population is targeted for
"special" treatment. Nor does the size of the group
matter. The one percent are quite content with their special
status and have no objection to self-segregation in gated
communities.
Why do people feel the need to segregate themselves? Because
they are insecure.

Interesting and
"thought provoking" observation...

Thank you for
bringing the 'segregationist strain' that's alive and doing well
here in the USA to the forefront. Forever with us (witnessed in
my lifetime anyway) I have always believed that its because
humans desire a One-upmanship lead over one another. It appears
that if the members of our species do not have someone who
appears less than we, it diminishes our being somehow; whether it
be economically or physically, theres an intrinsic need to
segregate those with less (or those with more from those with
less) therefore marginalizing groups of people based on some sort
of caste system (http://www.dummies.com/...). Sadly this will
probably be a part of human existence for a long, long time but
there are places on this Earth where governments and the people
who live under these governments have somewhat risen above this
inborn bondage of thought. thinkingblue.

From this site: http://shine.yahoo.com/...Best Places to Be Born in 2013
Though America may be the "land of opportunity,"
Switzerland will be the best place to be born in 2013
according to a quality-of-life index from the Economist
Intelligence Unit.
The EIU, a sister company to The Economist magazine,
determines quality of life based on surveys of the population
covering 11 factors including wealth, crime, family life,
trust in government and the stability of the economy.
Income estimates for babies born in 2013 are based on
projections for the year 2030, when those children will come
of age.
The top ten best places to be born in 2013:
1. Switzerland
2. Australia
3. Norway
4. Sweden
5. Denmark
6. Singapore
7. New Zealand
8. Netherlands
9. Canada
10. Hong Kong
With its small but very stable economy, Switzerland comes in
first, wealthy, healthy and trusting of its PUBLIC
INSTITUTIONS. The United States, "where babies will
inherit the large debts of the boomer generation, languishes
back in 16th place," the EIU explains. Feeling the
effects of the European monetary crisis, "the largest
European economies, France (26), Germany (tied with the U.S.
for 16) and Britain (27), don't do particularly well."

---

A perfect
example of the human need to marginalize groups for an advantage
is the Taliban, captured in this political image:

I hope that
someday we can all just get along and care about one another's
well-being But I won't hold my breath. thinkingblue